Hillary Clinton Distances Herself From Obama

Just over a year after leaving her job as secretary of state, Hillary Clinton has offered views on foreign policy that analysts said seem part of an effort to distance herself from the Obama administration as she prepares a possible 2016 White House run.
In appearances this month, Clinton struck a hawkish tone on issues including Iran and Russia, even while expressing broad support for the work done by Obama and her successor as secretary of state, John Kerry.
Clinton said in New York on Wednesday night she was "personally skeptical" of Iran's commitment to reaching a comprehensive agreement on its nuclear program.
"I've seen their behavior over (the) years," she said, saying that if the diplomatic track failed, "every other option does remain on the table."
Just two weeks earlier, Clinton was forced to backtrack after she drew parallels between Russian President Vladimir Putin and Nazi dictator Adolf Hitler at a closed-door fundraiser. In comments leaked to the media by a local reporter who attended the event, Clinton said Putin's justifications for his actions in the Crimean region were akin to moves Hitler made in the years before World War Two. "I'm not making a comparison, certainly, but I am recommending that we can perhaps learn from this tactic that has been used before," she said the next day at an event in Los Angeles.
As secretary of state, Clinton was a key player in a U.S. effort to reset relations with Russia, a policy that critics say now appears to be a glaring failure.
Clinton's recent rhetoric on Iran and Russia is part of a renewed focus on foreign policy for the former first lady and New York senator, who is widely considered the Democratic presidential front-runner in 2016 if she chooses to run.
She has been giving speeches across the country since leaving the State Department, but Wednesday's address was her first on-the-record event in recent months focused solely on international relations.
"Secretary Clinton is distancing herself a bit on foreign policy matters from the administration recently," said John Hudak, a Brookings Institution fellow and expert on presidential campaigns. "This is a pretty standard practice for anyone looking to succeed the sitting president, even within the same party."
"It's one of the first steps for her to say, 'We're not the same candidate,'" he said.
Clinton's office did not respond to questions about the issue.
Creating space between her position and Obama's is a "smart move," said Hank Sheinkopf, a New York-based Democratic strategist who worked for the 1996 presidential re-election campaign of Hillary Clinton's husband, Bill Clinton.
"The present administration is in a no-win situation with Russia, with Syria and in the Middle East," Sheinkopf said before Clinton's New York speech. "Making a distance from them can only help."
During her four-year tenure in the State Department, Clinton helped lead the charge on imposing strong sanctions on Iran, which she mentioned in her New York speech to a pro-Israel audience - including several Democratic lawmakers - at an American Jewish Congress dinner honoring her.
In late January, Clinton sent a letter to Carl Levin, Democratic chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, calling herself a "longtime advocate for crippling sanctions against Iran," but urging that Congress not impose new sanctions during negotiations over Tehran's nuclear program.
She said that like Obama, she had no illusions about the ease or likelihood of reaching a permanent deal with Iran following an interim agreement reached under Kerry.
"Yet I have no doubt that this is the time to give our diplomacy the space to work," a stance she reaffirmed on Wednesday.
Republicans have promised to make Clinton's State Department record an issue if she runs for the White House, focusing on the 2012 attacks on a U.S. diplomatic outpost in Benghazi, Libya, in which four Americans, including Ambassador Chris Stevens, were killed.
The Republican National Committee has condemned Clinton's handling of the Benghazi assault, suggesting in a recent research note that "Benghazi is still the defining moment of Clinton's tenure as Secretary of State."
Some political analysts see her toughening rhetoric as more than a campaign tactic, and fitting with her foreign policy statements before joining the Obama administration. They said that could broaden her appeal to voters if she chooses to run, a decision she has said will not come until the end of this year.
Clinton, while a senator, voted in 2002 for a resolution authorizing U.S. military action against Iraq, a position that hurt her with liberal primary voters in her losing battle with Obama for the 2008 Democratic presidential nomination.
"Making a credible and forceful case for America's place in the world - that's the kind of thing she's likely to say and continue to say," said Josh Block, a former Clinton administration official and now an executive at the Israel Project in Washington. "Those are messages that will resonate with Democrats and independents, as well as some Republicans." (Editing by Peter Cooney and Douglas Royalty)

Read Latest Breaking News from Newsmax.com http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/foreign-policy-president-run/2014/03/22/id/561085#ixzz2woRpDGz3
Urgent: Should Obamacare Be Repealed? Vote Here Now!

Facing tough Senate races, Reid, fellow Dems turn their attack on Koch brothers

  Political attacks on the Koch brothers have emerged as a key, practically everyday part of Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and his Democratic Party’s 2014 election strategy -- accusing the wealthy conservative donors of trying to buy elections and block aid to Ukraine.
The attacks began in earnest last month when the Nevada Democrat in notable floor speeches accused Charles and David Koch of being “un-American” and “trying to buy America” and continued straight through this week.
“Across the country Republican Senate candidates are embracing a dangerous agenda that’s good for billionaires like the Koch Brothers and bad for nearly everyone else in the country,” the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee said Thursday in announcing a record-breaking February fundraising haul of $6.8 million.  
That Democrats would attack the Kochs, or mount a counter-attack, is to be expected, considering how their money was instrumental in helping conservative nonprofits assist Republicans in taking the House in the 2010 midterm elections. Furthermore, Reid argues the Kochs are really trying to "buy" elections to advance their self-serving corporate interests of lower taxes and less regulation.
In this cycle, the brothers have already given a reported $30 million to nonprofits such as Americans for Prosperity to help pay for attack ads on ObamaCare and against incumbent Senate Democrats, as they try to defend their party’s six-seat majority in the upper chamber in an increasingly tough political environment.
The group has already spent a reported $700,000 in ads against Arkansas Democratic incumbent Sen. Mark Pryor, who is trailing challenger and Arkansas GOP Rep. Tom Cotton by 3 percentage points, according to an averaging of polls by nonpartisan RealClearPolitics.com
The Koch-backed attacks have also extended into a money war with the pro-Democrat group Senate Majority PAC, which spent a reported $3 million on ads on tough Senate races in Arkansas, Colorado, Louisiana, Michigan and North Carolina and drew a sharp response.
On Friday, Philip Ellender of Koch Industries told Politico the ads marked “the latest round in a series of attacks and attempts to silence private citizens who dare to disagree with the policies of the Majority Leader and the [Obama] administration.”
Ellender also said Reid specifically has decided to focus on “intimidating political opposition and squelching dissent,” instead of creating jobs and improving the lives of Americans.
Republicans, though, are hardly the only ones benefiting from the political spending of well-heeled backers.
Former hedge fund manager and California billionaire Tom Steyer reportedly is planning to spend at least $100 million (half of it his own money) on attack ads this year against candidates who aren’t supporting efforts to address climate change.
And until recently, even some moderate Senate Democrats were enjoying donations from the Koch brothers’ political action committee. But as that money shifted directions, Democrats stopped holding their tongues.
Charles Koch, 78, and David Koch, 73, inherited a small oil company from their father. They expanded worldwide into chemicals, textiles, paper and other products, building a hugely profitable and privately held conglomerate.
Long active in conservative politics, they seized on the 2010 Citizens United court ruling that allows unlimited corporate spending on political campaigns, often without disclosing donors. They helped found Americans for Prosperity, which reported spending $122 million on elections in 2012. In addition, Charles Koch helped start the Washington-based Cato Institute in the late 1970s. The family has given millions to the Libertarian-minded think tank over the years but was involved in a public dispute with leaders several years ago.
As part of the Democratic offensive this year against the brothers, and the apparent attempt to keep criticism about them in the news cycle, Reid and fellow Senate leaders last week suggested the brothers are behind congressional Republicans agreeing to support a Ukraine aid package only in exchange for delays in IRS rules that would impact the political activities of nonprofits like Americans for Prosperity.
Reid returned to the Senate floor last week to say that when Republican senators rush to defend the Koch brothers, they are also defending the brothers’ “radical philosophy.”
He challenged Republicans by asking, “Is even one of you willing to stand up and disavow the Koch brothers’ radical agenda?”
Louisiana Republican Sen. David Vitter has publicly defended the brothers, saying at a recent town hall meeting that they are “two of the most patriotic Americans.”
“God bless the Koch brothers," said Vitter, according to YouTube video posted by trackers American Bridge. “They’re fighting for our freedom.”

Louisiana bans use of welfare benefits for tattoos, lingerie, jewelry

BATON ROUGE, La. –  Louisiana welfare recipients will be prohibited from spending the federal assistance at lingerie shops, tattoo parlors, nail salons and jewelry stores, under new limits enacted by state social services officials.
The Department of Children and Family Services announced the emergency regulations late Thursday. They cover the Family Independence Temporary Assistance Program — commonly known as welfare benefits — and the Kinship Care Subsidy Program.
Both programs pay cash assistance to low-income families for items like food, clothing and housing.
DCFS Secretary Suzy Sonnier said the agency decided to ban the use of electronic benefit cards, which work as debit cards, at stores that don't sell items that are considered basic needs for families.
"This rule will not affect families who currently use the program as intended, which is to provide food, shelter and clothing for families," Sonnier said in a statement.
About 3,500 households in Louisiana receive welfare benefits, and about 2,400 households get kinship care subsidies, according to the department. Average payments are $192 per month for welfare and $419 a month for kinship care.
The emergency regulations come a week after WAFB-TV in Baton Rouge reported that an Ascension Parish lingerie store posted a sign noting that it accepted the welfare benefits card along with most credit cards.
Also barred in the latest restrictions from taking welfare debit cards are video arcades, bail bond companies, cruise ships, psychics, adult-entertainment businesses, nightclubs, bars and any businesses where minors are not allowed.
Violators of the new regulations will stop receiving welfare benefits for a year for a first offense, two years for a second offense and permanently for a third offense, according to the social services department.
The department also said it is seeking to enact the restrictions in law and allow the state to fine retailers who don't follow the guidelines. Rep. Chris Broadwater, R-Hammond, will sponsor the bill for consideration in the current legislative session.
"I hope that we can meet the spirit of intent of the program while also ensuring that state and federal tax dollars are being used appropriately," Broadwater said in a statement.
Last year, the social services agency enacted new regulations that banned the spending of welfare money on cigarettes, alcohol and lottery tickets. Those regulations also included prohibitions on the use of a welfare electronic benefit card at liquor stores, gambling sites and strip clubs, as required under a recently-passed federal law.
Tracking violations may be difficult, however, because the welfare money can be taken off the electronic benefit card as cash through an ATM. Social services officials said they rely on businesses and the public to report suspected violations.

Issa subpoenas ATF over 'mismanaged' gun operation

Rep. Darrell Issa has subpoenaed the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives for information about what he calls a "dangerously mismanaged" program, which originally was launched to get crime guns off the street. 
The House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, which Issa chairs, has been looking into complaints about the program for months. Under the operation, ATF agents set up storefronts in multiple cities to try and entice criminals to sell their crime guns, unwittingly, to the government so they could be traced. But their tactics and missteps, including using mentally disabled people, drew criticism.   

ADVERTISEMENT

Issa, R-Calif., claimed this week that the ATF has stonewalled him by withholding documents and shown a "complete lack of cooperation." 
"I have no choice today but to issue the enclosed subpoena," he wrote to ATF Director B. Todd Jones. "... The time for hollow promises is over." 
Details on problems with the program first emerged last January, when The Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel reported on missteps in Milwaukee under the program known as Operation Fearless. In that operation, thousands of dollars in merchandise, as well as several guns, were reportedly stolen from ATF agents. 
Details of other similar operations in other cities later emerged, including claims that one operation was located across the street from a middle school. House committees are now investigating, on the heels of the controversy over the botched anti-gun trafficking Operation Fast and Furious. 
ATF agents, though, have defended the storefront program, saying lawmakers overstate the problem. 
"Putting this into context, there were deficiencies with the storefront operations, but there have been many successes and it still remains a viable technique when managed well," ATF Deputy Director Tom Brandon told lawmakers recently. 
The operation in Milwaukee, despite its flaws, resulted in dozens of arrests.

notorious fraudster was behind costly EPA regulations

Another Democrat ??

John Beale, the former EPA official who fooled his bosses into believing he worked for the CIA, was deeply involved in crafting costly environmental standards which still are having an impact today -- though he came into the job with little, if any, environmental experience. 
The details were included in a 67-page report from Republicans on the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works, which claims the fraudster's role should now throw those rules into question. 
The report is the product of months of research into the case of Beale, a top official in the Office of Air and Radiation, who was sentenced to prison in December for defrauding the agency with his CIA lie. It details Beale's role in crafting an aggressive regulatory approach which the report dubs the "EPA Playbook." 
"Ultimately, the guiding [principle] behind the Playbook is the Machiavellian [principle] that the ends will justify the means," the report says. 
Sen. David Vitter, R-La., top Republican on the committee, said in a statement that the study "connects the dots between John Beale and the numerous air regulations that he's responsible for." 
The EPA already has come under scrutiny for failing to act earlier on warning signs about Beale's behavior and fraudulent activity. But the report also calls into question the regulatory work Beale had done over an EPA career that began in the late '80s -- and its lingering impact on businesses today. 
"The product of his labors have remained intact and have been shielded from any meaningful scrutiny, much the same way Beale was protected by an inner circle of career staff who unwittingly aided in his fraud," the report says. "Accordingly, it appears that the Agency is content to let the American people pay the price for Beale and EPA's scientific insularity, a price EPA is still trying to hide almost twenty years later." 
Beale was first brought on as a career employee by his friend Robert Brenner in 1989, after a stint working as a consultant for the agency. According to the Senate GOP report, he had no environmental experience, and his federal legislative experience was limited to an unpaid internship for a senator. Yet he was brought on at the maximum pay level for an employee of his kind -- at a level typically reserved for people with 20 years' experience, according to the report. 
In 1995, Beale and Brenner apparently began working on what are known as National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for Ozone and Particulate Matter (PM). This was a far-reaching process to regulate pollutants in the air -- the push to regulate Particulate Matter covered small particles ranging from smoke to soot to fumes to dust. According to the report, Beale and the rest of the agency ran with the project. 
"Under Beale's leadership EPA took the unprecedented action of proposing standards for the two pollutants in tandem and aggressively tightened the standards to controversial levels," the report said. 
The report goes on to argue that the 1997 standards that resulted "set in motion" the way the EPA issues regulations under the Clean Air Act. The report alleges that this included "inflating benefits while underestimating costs." 
Asked for comment on the Republican report, EPA spokeswoman Alisha Johnson acknowledged Beale's role in the air quality rules but noted he was among many people involved in that process. 
"While Mr. Beale did work on the rules mentioned in the report, he was just one of a large number of people from a number of disciplines across the Agency who provided input on those rules," she said in an email. Those rules, she noted, for the most part were upheld by the courts. 
"Since that time, both standards have been re-reviewed and re-issued by the EPA," Johnson said. "The standards followed the routine open, transparent and public process, providing opportunities for public and interagency review and comment prior to their finalization." 
Despite Republican accusations, the agency defends its air quality standards as firmly grounded in science. 
The Senate GOP study details specific regulations that relied on these standards, including the EPA's controversial regulations on coal-fired power plants. Amid these and other rules, dozens of power plants have been slated for retirement in recent years. 
The report says the air quality standards have also been used to defend 32 major rules since 1997, which together account for billions of dollars in costs to U.S. businesses. 
The so-called "playbook" for implementing EPA rules began during the 1997 process, and allegedly included inflating benefits of proposed rules, as well as using a controversial tactic known as "sue-and-settle" -- where a "friendly" group sues the agency and settles on "mutually agreeable terms." The report says Brenner and Beale were behind that "playbook." 
Republicans argue in the study that Beale reached the "pinnacle of his career" during that 1997 process, and used that status to defraud the agency for years. 
The inspector general's investigation, which later uncovered the fraud, found Beale received improper bonuses until 2013 -- the improper bonuses ended up totaling about $500,000.  This, while he was taking off time supposedly to work for the CIA. 
Since the fraud was made public, EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy has been credited by some with initially flagging Beale's activities and expenses. EPA bosses say they were duped by his CIA story, despite the warning signs. 
An EPA spokeswoman said earlier that Beale "went to great lengths to deceive and defraud the U.S. government over the span of more than a decade" and the agency has "put in place additional safeguards to help protect against fraud and abuse related to employee time and attendance." 
Brenner retired from the agency in 2011.

Medical group that backed ObamaCare warns obscure rule could hurt doctors

The largest doctors group in the country is raising alarm that an obscure ObamaCare rule could stick them with the tab for patients who skip out on paying their premiums. 
The American Medical Association, which originally supported the Affordable Care Act, warned the rule could pose a "significant financial risk" for doctors and hospitals, and on Wednesday blasted out guidelines to help members try and avoid those costs. 
At issue is a 90-day "grace period" which lets patients who are not paying their premiums keep coverage for 90 days before it can be canceled. 
Under the rule, insurers are responsible for paying any claims during the first month of that period -- but not necessarily for any claims during the final 60 days. 
"Managing risk is typically a role for insurers, but the grace period rule transfers two-thirds of that risk from the insurers to physicians and health care providers," AMA President Ardis Dee Hoven said in a statement. 
The concern from physicians comes on top of widespread concerns from the insurance industry about the mix of new customers being signed up for coverage under the newly launched health insurance exchanges. The deadline for that coverage is March 31, and so far the Obama administration is lagging behind its enrollment projections. 
But while insurance companies worry about having to take on costlier patients, medical practices are worried what happens when those patients stop paying their insurers. 
The AMA has been urging the Obama administration to tweak the rules so that insurers are at least required to notify doctors as soon as a patient falls behind on insurance payments. In the interim, the guidelines sent out Wednesday were meant to help doctors and hospitals "minimize" those risks -- by, among other things, closely tracking grace-period notifications and checking whether state laws allow insurers to deny claims during these periods. 
The main concern is that insurers could be allowed to place all claims incurred during the last 60 days in a "pending status" -- and then deny them if coverage ultimately is canceled. 
But the administration argues that the grace-period rule is limited. It only applies to people who already have paid one month's premium, and requires insurers to tell doctors "as soon as practicable" when a customer is falling behind. 
"Grace periods are important to ensure that consumers aren't dropped from coverage, especially for those experiencing economic challenges," said Alicia Hartinger, spokeswoman for the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. "It is also important to us that providers know in a timely fashion whether their patients are in a grace period or not." 
One possible -- and controversial -- solution for hospitals is for them to help struggling patients pay their premiums. But, as the AMA guidelines noted, the Department of Health and Human Services has strongly advised against this and threatened to take action if necessary.   
The AMA said doctors "should exercise extreme caution" before even discussing that possibility with patients.

California city approves highest-in-state $12.30 minimum wage

RICHMOND, Calif. –  A San Francisco Bay Area city is on track to have the highest minimum wage in California.
The Richmond City Council voted 6-1 on Tuesday in favor of an ordinance that would raise minimum hourly pay in the city to $12.30 an hour by 2017.
That would be nearly $2 more than San Francisco's current minimum wage, which is the highest in the region.
The state minimum wage is set to increase to $10 an hour in January 2016.
The Contra Costa Times reports that most of the 30 or so residents who spoke at the Richmond council meeting were in favor of raising the minimum wage.
But at least one business owner said it would make it difficult for him to add jobs.

(Bailey) Is this going to be for the legals or illegals ?

Russia